How To Avoid Becoming A Secular Pharisee

I want to tie two seemingly unrelated quotes together. The first quote comes from Jesus's parable of the two men praying in Luke 18:9-14 (click here for the source):

 

9 Now He also told this parable to some people who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and viewed others with contempt: 10 “Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee stood and began praying this in regard to himself: ‘God, I thank You that I am not like other people: swindlers, crooked, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week; I pay tithes of all that I get.’ 13 But the tax collector, standing some distance away, was even unwilling to raise his eyes toward heaven, but was beating his chest, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, the sinner!’ 14 I tell you, this man went to his house justified rather than the other one; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted.”

The second quote come from the speech that Martin Luther King Jr. gave protesting the Vietnam War (click here for the source):

'The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just.'

Before I connect the two quotes together, we need to substitute a fill-in-the-blank for the word 'Western.' As a result, we come up with the following:

The ________ arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not  just.'

Note that we can use any group's or individual's name in the fill-in-the-blank. For examples:

The Leftist arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just

or

Curt's arrogance of feeling that he has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just

And so we should see that this arrogance of feeling knows no personal, group, nor ideological boundary. From here, we should easily see the connection between the 2 quotes. In the former, we see the Pharisee who offers evidence of his own righteousness by how he is  morally superior to the Tax Collector.  The Pharisee proudly proclaims that not only is he morally superior to the Tax Collector, that he is without fault while the Tax Collector is without merit.

And what is said in the second quote? That the 'Western arrogance of feeling' proclaims that the West believes that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them. This does not just imply that the West believes that it is superior to other parts of the world, it claims that the disparity is so great that the West is completely self-sufficient while the rest of the world is dependent on the West. Just as a side note, do we still wonder why there are some Americans, the President for example, who are plagued with narcissism?

Those of us who believe in Christ should be alarmed at having such arrogance. We should be alarmed because arrogance is not only not smiled on by God in either the Old or New Testaments, such arrogance brings God's opposition and punishment. And so no believer should have such an arrogance of feeling, but many of us do anyway.

To the unbeliever, having such an arrogance of feeling is not necessarily a problem as it is for the Christian, and so many of them could enjoy being arrogant, but not all do. And so one of the many conditions that harms the reputation of the Gospel is when an individual or group of believers are arrogant while there are many unbelievers who are repulsed by that characteristic.

By now we should see how the second quote can be an example of the Pharisee's attitude expressed in the first quote. Though they are not identical, the two quotes have enough in common so that the person or group  in question in the 2nd quote becomes an example of the Pharisee from the 1st quote. And since what the West was trying to teach others involved secular concerns, then we can conclude that one does not have to be religious to be a Pharisee. That those who have only secular interests can be Pharisees too.

The possibility of becoming a Pharisee should, for us who believe in Christ,  strike fear in us because of what happens to the Pharisee in the end.  We should also note that, for us believers in Christ, there is never a time whenwe can safely pray the prayer of the Pharisee nor is there a time when we no longer need to pray like the Tax Collector.

For unbelievers, the possibility of becoming a Pharisee means that one is emulating the characteristics of what they often criticize Christians for. 

Many of my fellow believers will object to what has been written here by claiming that because they have Biblical worldview, in contrast to the worldviews of unbelievers, they have everything to teach unbelievers and nothing to learn from them because they have what unbelievers don't have. Here, James Boice's criticisms of Monasticism and the early Anabaptists apply here as well. We should note that those Monastics and Anabaptists believed that, because of how corrput unbelievers were, they had nothing to learn from unbelievers, Boice said that the attitude of the Monastics and early Anabaptists failed both to appreciate the effects that God's common grace could have on people in government and on those influencing culture as well as it  'overestimated' the godliness of devout believers including themselves (see pg 104 of Two Cities, Two Loves: Christian Responsibility In A Crumbling Culture). And so those fellow believers who conclude that they have everything to teach unbelievers because of  their own adherence to a biblical worldview have deceived themselves about both their godliness and the contributions that unbelievers can contribute.

At this point, we should point out the carrot that arrogance holds out in front of us. That carrot consists of feeling good about oneself. That carrot consists of feeling a sense of significance. In fact, feeling superior to others can be especially gratifying especially when others consist, in part, of those whom we do not respect or even despise. In addition, being arrogant can lead us to feeling entitled over others. However, because being arrogant can make some feel significant, challenging a part of those beliefs that makes them feel significant, regardless of the facts and logic one employs, can be perceived as a personal attack by those who feel superior to others.

Certainly there are individuals and groups from all over the ideological spectrum that could accurately be used in the above fill-in-the-blank. And there are other times in which our own names could accurately put in the fill-in-the-blank. But because of the current situation, we need to look at the Evangelical support for President Trump and his policies. Why? It is because of both what Trump has said and done, especially during his 2nd term as President, and the level of support he gets from religiously conservative Christians.

Note that Trump had campaigned on the claim that only he can fix it with it being the nation with its problems. Trump had hats made saying: 'Trump Was Right About Everything.' Or consider the title of a Charlie Kirk book: The MAGA Doctrine: The Only Ideas That Will Win The Future. Don't both Trump's self-proclamations and the book title sound way to similar to what was said in the second quote? And, if so, can't both Trump's self-proclamations and Kirk's book title  cause those who embrace those sentiments to speak like what was said in the 2nd quote?

If so, then perhaps the Evangelical community needs to reexamine the kind of commitment that it has made to both Trump and the MAGA Doctrine. The claim that some believers have all of the knowledge while unbelievers have none should raise a score of red flags because of the arrogance that such a claim carries with it. The recommended reexamination does not imply that one must necessarily leave the Trump and MAGA followings, though I would strongly recommend it, such a reexamination should cause Christians in the Trump and MAGA followings to adamantly stand for drastic change in both their leader and their their groups. That change must include promoting hybrid approaches and solutions to our nation's problems rather than just Trump and MAGA ones. Those hybrid solutions must have contributions from unbelievers who hold to different ideologies than MAGA ones. That is because, as the Scripture say, 'GOD IS OPPOSED TO THE PROUD' (which is part of I Peter 5:5). And looking down on others as inferiors is a first and almost certain indicator that one is arrogant. On the other hand, recognizing the contributions that those outside one's group can make is evidence, though not necessarily proof, that one is not arrogant.

For those fellow believers who insist on Christian Nationalism, arrogance cannot be one of their traits. In fact, arrogance should never be a part of any Christian's life. And we should note that for those of us believers who have escaped the clutches of yearning for Christian Nationalism, we have our own sins to battle. We can neither entertain the notion that we are superior to any Christian Nationalist nor think that we have nothing to learn from them. We too should seek hybrid approaches and solutions to our nation's problems. This should cause us to avoid the all-or-nothing thinking that Trump and many MAGA followers employ--a kind of thinking that provides the cognitive foundation for authoritarianism. And that authoritarianism would make believers do what both Jesus and Peter warned against: the lording it over of others.

  

One Of The Reasons For Why Our Nation Is So Divided

 One of the best, if not the best, quotes from Martin Luther King Jr. is below. It was part of his speech/sermon against the Vietnam War:

'The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just'

Now if we replace the word 'Western' with a fill-in-the-blank, we get an idea of why we are so divided in this nation:

'The ______ arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just'

According to the above modified quote, the reason why America is so divided is that we Americans have an abundance of arrogance. I say an abundance because there are quite a few individuals and groups that believe that they have everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them. And the more ideological a people becomes, the more vulnerable they are to succumb to such an arrogance of feeling. Also we should note that this arrogance of feeling has crossed all ideological lines quite some time ago.

But perhaps there is something else involved here in addition to, or even a part of, that arrogance of feeling. After all, just think of what one must know to actually have all of the answers to the major economical, political, or social issues in our world. To know all of the answers would be attribute which we would more likely to associate with God, not people.

Just perhaps some of that arrogance is an exhibition of compensation, or overcompensation to be precise. And what could be driving the need to compensate or even overcompensate? It could be an overcompensation for feeling a lack of significance. It could be an overcompensation for having been looked down on, or having experienced marginalization, or, in the case of my fellow religiously conservative Christians, having suffered a massive loss of status in society while believing that we are special or better than others. And thus to feel significant, one dreams of astounding others with one's own or their group's abilities. In this case, that ability would be discovering or having the right beliefs that allows them to possess all of the answers to a certain set of political, economical, or social problems which a nation or the world needs.

To argue with facts and logic with someone who is seeking to feel significant can easily be counterproductive. That is because as the facts and logic challenges a given person's ideology, it is threatening their personal sense of significance. And so challenging such a person's ideology can easily be perceived as a threat by that person. 

Now that is as far as my mind can take me on this subject. That is because I am still stuck at the stage of arguing with a such a person using only facts and logic. I don't know enough about how to address issues without challenging a person's sense of significance. 

But what I can ascertain here is that with all of the divisions we currently have in our nation, feeling insignificant might be at endemic levels in our nation. I am sure that there are a multitude of reasons for why many feel insignificant. And why a person or group feels insignificant must be studied on a case by case basis.

And so perhaps the next time any of us get into a heated debate where the other person acts as if they, their ideology, their religion, or whatever else enables them to believe that they have all of the answers, consider what their beliefs say about them. For people are partially like stars. By that I don't mean that people are bright. And I am certainly referring to the fact that some people are full of gas. 

What I am referring to is what we see when we see stars in the sky. Yes, we see light. But in terms of time, what do we see? We see the past.

So when we see or hear people, we are seeing their pasts. But because people are only partially like stars, we see more than people's pasts; we see their present too. And deciphering what is reflecting a person's past from observing their present behavior and words is not an easy task and is filled with opportunities to make errors. But this fact that our words and behaviors can reveal our pasts should temper our reactions to what they say or do with which we strongly disagree.

Just suffice it to say that feel insignificant seems to be endemic in our society. That could be the result of our lifestyles. It could be the result of our own values. It could be the result of the values of our society and/or culture. It could be the result of our nation's history. And it could be the result of our own past. And so no matter how strongly  with which disagree with someone, we must not talk down to them or act as if we are superior. We must not do that, but of course we all will at times.

 

Has Character Ever Really Counted?

 The importance of a candidates candidate's character to a Presidential election can be similar to the practice of not nominating a Supreme Court Justice during an election year. In both cases, Republicans have shown themselves to be opportunistic rather than principled. When Obama tried to nominate a justice to the Supreme Court, the Republicans said that it was not right to do so during an election year. However, when Trump did the same thing as Obama, all of the sudden, the Republicans pulled a 180.

Something similar happened when it came to determining whether character counted in voting for a Presidential candidate. When the bad parts of then President Clinton's character became evident via his sexual scandals, Republicans wanted him out on the street because, they claimed, 'character counts.' But when we saw the ugliness of Trump's character for similar offenses, the Republican tune changed to singing 'nice guys finish last.'

How sad it is for Christians and the reputation of the Gospel that the vast majority of religiously conservative Christians have bound themselves to the current Republican Party under Trump. For the Gospel, because of the support of given by conservative Evangelicals to the Republican Party, has been implicated in that Party's hypocrisy and current attempts to grab more and more power.

At least more conservative Christian leaders are speaking out against electing Trump than in 2016. And an example of such a leader is John Piper (click here for a brief bio and description of his website). Piper  recently wrote an article for his blog that questioned Christians on voting for Trump. He didn't say whom we should vote for, but he spoke strongly on why Trump doesn't deserve to be President. And one of the why he believes Trump should not be President is because of Trump's character (click here for the article).

According to Piper, and many others, Trump's character is sorely lacking in virtue. That was clear during the 2016 campaign when certain details of his sex life and views of women were revealed. But now, we have even more revelations of Trump's character through his speeches and tweets. And one trait strongly comes across when Trump speaks publicly: arrogance. Note the following from Piper's article:

When a leader models self-absorbed, self-exalting boastfulness, he models the most deadly behavior in the world. He points his nation to destruction. Destruction of more kinds than we can imagine.

 

 It isn't that Piper didn't list some of Trump's other faults. It is that of all of the faults, Piper mentions this one as a fatal flaw. And it isn't just a fatal flaw for Trump alone; it is fatal to his followers who imitate him out of hero worship. Thus, and Piper says this in other places to, because of Trump's position, many of his flaws become the flaws of those who support or follow him. And that has been made all too obvious by the deepest political divide America has for as long as I have been alive. For arrogance makes us deaf to others. And that deafness is a driving force behind America's political divide.

Trump's arrogance has even inspired racist groups to speak out. And some are going to be self-designated poll watchers and thus possibly, however inadvertently, engage in voter suppression.

Trump's arrogance extends to official documents. Please note the White House Briefing, linked to below, claimed about the accomplishments of Trump'a Presidency as it pertains to the pandemic (click here for the source):

The United States has among the lowest case fatality rates of any major country

According to the best estimates from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 99.997 percent of individuals aged 19 and younger who contract coronavirus make a full recovery, 99.98 percent of those aged 20 to 49 make a full recovery, and 99.5 percent aged 50 to 69 fully recover.

Of those under the age of 70 who become infected, over 99 percent recover from the disease.

The problem with the first claim is that it is false. Using the ncov2019.live/data website statistics on October 29, 2020, which, for as long as I have checked, is a little over 3% within the Johns Hopkins statistics, America's case fatality rate is 2.55%. But the case fatality rate of Germany and Poland were lower than that at 2.11% and 1.61% respectively speaking. The case fatality rate for Japan was 1.75% and for South Korea it was 1.76%. So it is clear that the US does not have the lowest fatality rates among major nations. We could add to that that the US death rate per 1,000,000 people is the 8th highest in the world. 

As for fatality rates by age, if the above stats are true, then America's case fatality rate should be 1% or less. But if that is true and roughly 234,000 Americans have died because of Covid-19, then America should have roughly 23,400,000 cases of Covid-19. But it doesn't. as stated before.

Trump's arrogance and boisterous claims are injecting his followers with similar traits while making similar claims. And they are not only making voting decisions based on faulty statistics, they are using that fake data to try to convince others of Trump's accomplishments that never took place.

We should only note that Trump's unofficial army of militias are now beginning to boldly make their presence known. Add to that that they are often armed when appearing in public with some looking for confrontations. Such practices provides ominous historical reminders of pre-Nazi Germany  in the late 1920s and early 1930s especially since Trump has described his political opponents as "socialists."

Piper's article is well worth reading. And though we only took a couple of points from it here, evidence for his claims about what Trump's arrogance and other traits are doing to the nation can be seen almost daily in the news.

Piper makes an excellent point about the poison that a candidate's character can infect the nation. Hopefully, both Trump and our nation will change before it becomes too late.

How Will We Respond To The Quest For More Power?

Have been taking a lot of time off from the blog for personal reasons. In the meantime, what started so seemingly innocent with the passage of the Patriot Act has become a global problem: the quest for more power by those with power. George Monbiot recently wrote an article about this for ZNet (click here for the article). Monbiot specifically focused on the growing fascism that exists in India, Brazil, the Philippines, the UK, and the US. But those aren't the only ones he mentioned. The sign of authoritarianism which he is focusing on is the growing disregard for law by national leaders.

And just as it is with wealth among many who are wealthy, one of the reasons for obtaining more power is to keep up with the Joneses--as they use to say when I was young.

For the US, what enables favored leaders to grab for more power is the holdover authoritarian culture left by America's Christian influences. Religiously conservative Christianity naturally  tends toward authoritarianism with followers embracing a passive authoritarianism. Such an embrace enables our leader(s) to seek more power provided they promote the agenda of my fellow religiously conservative Christians. Part of that agenda is a legitimate pro-life concern for the unborn. But as our President has instituted policies that favor the wealthy which put social safety nets in harms way, that pro-life of my fellow Christians concern shows significant cracks from compromise. 

Another part of the agenda of many of us religiously conservative Christians is that our religious liberties, in our case our right to discriminate against the LGBT community in the public square, be protected. This shows the self-centeredness that many of us religiously conservative Christians have obliviously but passionately embraced.

What is destroying America, and the World too, is unbridled arrogance and greed not just by some, but by many of its leaders. And that is exhibited by a continual grabbing for power. All of this has been stated in a number of ways for a while and yet no one listens. And that greed and pride is not just for the wealthy, it is for people of the lower classes who support their preferred authoritarian leaders because those leaders throw them enough bones to make them feel significant and protected. Here we should note that some Churches from other nations practice similar sins. For the Church in Egypt and Syria have latched on to tyrannical leaders because those leaders protect those Christians.

Thus, religiously conservative American Christians are putting their own nation at a threatening crossroads. For America to break with the world's penchant for authoritarianism, it will have to divorce itself from conservative Christianity or America's religiously conservative Christians must do an about-face. With the latter seemingly unlikely, religiously conservative Christians are asking for a persecution that they have been crying wolf over for the past few years. And why is that? It is because of arrogance and greed.


 

So Much For Always Reforming

R.C. Sproul (click here for a bio) has written an article with a question that should strike fear into the hearts of all conservative Christians. Is the Reformation over (click here for the article), he asks. What are the grounds for his concern? His grounds consist of the deemphasis on the Reformation's doctrine of justification. In short, this doctrine declares that we are saved through faith in Christ alone and that our works do nothing to secure our salvation. The existence of this deemphasis, according to Sproul, is shown by the attitudes more and more evangelicals are showing toward this doctrine.

To his credit, Sproul shows a deep concern for the heart of the Gospel. And while Sproul shows balance by contrasting the progress that has been in terms of how we disagree with one another since the 16^th century and how a Church with whom he has many differences has positively contributed to the moral life of society, in the end, he shows why he doesn't fully understand why the deemphasis is occurring. How does he show this? It's very simple. He shows it by not reporting any dialog with those who are minimizing the significance of justification. Instead, he either covers old debate issues with old opponents such as the Roman Church, or he cites questions asked by a theological ally. In the end, one's personal salvation is what Sproul sees as not just the most important issue for all people, it is apparently the only issue. And Sproul shows it is the only issue at hand for him by not mentioning any current issue which has distracted people from listening to the Gospel.

The math of the issue at hand adds up this way: you start with a very individualized, personal Gospel + an examination of the issue that is predominantly from the past - adequate feedback from those who show a different emphasis on the Gospel = a number of possibilities. It can equal insularity. It can also equal self-absorption. How can we ever determine why others are not putting the same emphasis on the Gospel that we are unless we escape our theological shell and ask for their input?

Many of us religiously conservative Christians often expect not only rejection for preaching the Gospel, we are taught to expect persecution. And these expectations prevent us from either seeking or considering feedback from any secular audience. And it is that feedback that we need most. 

If I were to speculate why the Gospel is being deemphasized today by fellow evangelicals, one of the reasons could very well be our resistance to listen to those outside of our theological circles. And though these fellow evangelicals are in err when they lessen the imporance of the Gospel, they are correct by adding other concerns some of which could be coming from listening to their own audiences, to those outside their theological circles. When we do what Sproul seems to have done in the writing of this article is to say to the world: 'You need to listen to us, but we don't need to listen to you.'  Such an attitude requires a significant amount of arrogance--a trait that goes against the very nature of the Gospel.